Upload
votruc
View
217
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
PROCEEDING The 13th Malaysia Indonesia Conference on Economics, Management and Accounting (MIICEMA) 2012
360
THE INFLUENCE OF CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY
TO FIRM VALUE WITH PROFITABILITY AND LEVERAGE AS A
MODERATING VARIABLE
Febi Susanti
Fenny Marietza
Rini Indriani
Bengkulu University
Abstract
The aims of this research are to know; 1) the influence of corporate social responsibility
(CSR) to firm value, and 2) the influence of profitability and leverage as the moderating
variables in relation between corporate social responsibility and firm value. The
research sample is manufacturing sector in period 2008-2010 by using purposive
sampling method. There are 69 companies fulfilling criterion as this research sample.
The research data was analyzed using moderated regression analysis with SPSS version
16.0.
The results of this research show that corporate responsibility has a positive effect on
firm value. For moderating proxies by return on asset and leverage proxies by debt to
equity ratio were not a moderating variable in relation between CSR and firm value.
Keyword: Corporate Social Responsibility, Fir Value, Profitability, and Leverage.
INTRODUCTION
Today, giving attention to social and environmental aspects are important,
because it will give positive or negative impact to the company's image in social
communities.The company presence like double-edged sword in their social
environtmental. In one side,companies providing goods and services needed by society,
but on the other side their activities can harm people who lives around the company. If
people think the company did not pay attention to social aspects and environment and
didn’t give direct contribution,also they exposed the negative impact of the operation of
a company, it will cause the people's resistance against corporate or social upheaval.
Implementation of Corporate Social Responsibility by the company expected to
have a positive impact to improve the long-term corporate value, like incresing of
company’s earning and share pricing as a result of increasing a number of investors who
buy the company’s share.
There are many researchs on the relationship of corporate social responsibility
and the company value that showed inconsistent results. Nurlela and Islahuddin (2008)
found no evidence of an association of corporate social responsibility towards the
company. While the research conducted Harjoto and Jo (2007) found different results,
the disclosure of corporate social responsibility has a positive effect on corporate value.
PROCEEDING The 13th Malaysia Indonesia Conference on Economics, Management and Accounting (MIICEMA) 2012
361
The results are consistent with research Kusumadilaga (2010) which showed that
corporate social responsibility a significant effect on corporate value.
This study aims to examine the relationship disclosure of corporate social
responsibility with corporate values, and also test the influence of corporate social
responsibility disclosure to the company by using the profitability and leverage as a
moderating variable. The using of profitability and leverage as a moderating variable
have a strong reason based on the prior research conducted by Fauzi (2007) who prove
that the leverage could be a moderating CSR to financial performance. That research
appropriate with the agency theory which predicts that firms with higher leverage ratios
will reveal more information (Jensen & Meckling, 1976). Another research that
conducted by Kusumadilaga (2010) states that profitability as a moderating variable
didn’t affect the relationship of corporate social responsibility and corporate value.
The Research questions will be answered in this studyare:
1. Is corporate social responsibility has a positive effect on firm value?
2. Is profitability will moderate corporate social responsibility towards the
company value?
3. Is leverage will moderate corporate social responsibility towards the company
value?
BACKGROUND THEORY
1) The Theory of Stakeholder and Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)
Freeman (1983) mentioned that the existence of an organization (in this case
companies) are strongly influenced by the group that have a relationship with the
organization. Stakeholders theory is a theory which states that the company is not the
only entity that operates for its own sake, but also must provide benefits to all its
stakeholders.
The existence of an enterprise is strongly influenced by the support given by
stakeholders to the company (Chairiri, 2008). One strategy to maintain good
relationships with stakeholders and shareholders through the company by disclosing
corporate social responsibility which can inform about economic performance, social
and environmental as well as to all stakeholders.
The disclosure of CSR is expected to meet the need of the stakeholders that will
bring the harmonization relationship between the company and their stakeholders. This
condition will make company easy to achieve sustainability or preservation in the future
(Fahrizqi, 2010). Furthermore, if company can maximize the benefits to stakeholders, it
will bring satisfaction for the stakeholders that will increase the value of the company
(Murtini, 2008).
The Corporate Social Responsibility programs have aims to make balancing the
interests between the company and their stakeholders. Harjoto research and Jo (2007)
found that the disclosure of corporate social responsibility has a positive impact on firm
value. Based on the prior research, the hypothesis is:
H1: Corporate Social Responsibility has a positive effect on corporate value
2) Profitability,Corporate Social Responsibility, and Corporate Value
The company’s main goal is to increase the value of firm. The value will
continually increase if company notice the dimention of economics, socials and
environmentals while their running the operation. The economic dimension measured
by company's profitability, while the dimensions of social and environmental are
illustrated through corporate social responsibility.
PROCEEDING The 13th Malaysia Indonesia Conference on Economics, Management and Accounting (MIICEMA) 2012
362
Notes:
Y = corporate Value X2 = Profitability
X1 = Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) X3 = Leverage
Based on stakeholder theory, profitability can be viewed as the predicted
variables affecting the disclosure of social and environmental responsibility both
negative and positive depend on whether the company experienced a loss or a profit.
Kusumadilaga (2010) found that the profitability as a moderating variable could not
affect the relationship of CSR and corporate value. Meanwhile, Robert (1992) found
that profitability could affact corporate social responsibility.The second hypothesis is:
H2: Profitability moderating effect of CSR on corporate value
3) Leverage, Corporate Social Responsibility, and corporate value
Agency theory predicts that firms with higher leverage ratios will reveal more
information because high capital structures will increase cost of agency theory (Jensen
& Meckling, 1976). This theory as a background of using leverage as a moderating
variable. Fauzi (2007) which examines the relationship between the disclosure of
corporate social responsibility and financial performance with financial leverage and
firm size as a moderating variable. These results indicate that only financial leverage
could moderate between corporate social responsibility disclosure and financial
performance. But not all researchers support relationships between leverage and
corporate social responsibility. Anggraini (2006) failed to predict relationship between
two variables.
Based on the prior research conducted by many researcher, the third hypothesis is:
H3: Leverage moderating effect of CSR on firm value
Figure 1 shows empirical model hypothesis
Figure1 Conceptual Framework
METHODOLOGY
This study is an empirical research, which is conducted to test the hypothesis
with appropriate statistical method
Research Sampling and Data Selection
This study using population of manufacturing companies which is listing in
Indonesia Stock Exchange (BEI) from 2008 to 2010. Methods of sampling done by
purposive sampling with some criteria such as:
1) Providing financial reports with complete data for the measurement of the variables
during 2008 and 2010.
2) Financial statements using the local currency (rupiah).
Annual reports published by companies that have been sampled in the period
2008-2010 on the Jakarta Stock Exchange (JSX) are documentation. This study use
Dependent Variable
Y
Independent Variable
X1
Moderating Variable
X (2,3)
PROCEEDING The 13th Malaysia Indonesia Conference on Economics, Management and Accounting (MIICEMA) 2012
363
content analysis with a check list method for measuring CSR that contains the item-item
disclosure liability.
Definition of OperasionalVariable
This research using three type of variables are dependent variable, independent
variable and moderating variable. The dependent variable is corporate value, the
independent variable is corporate social responsibily and also profitability and leverage
as moderating variables.
- Corporate value can be defined as the ability of the company to maximize wealth of
their stakeholders or give some interest in return to all shareholders. One alternative
that is used to measure value of the company is Tobin's Q.
- Corporate social responsibility (CSR). Measured by given score to all social
disclosure information items in company’s annual report. If there is no specified item
of information disclosed in corporate annual reports is given a score of 1 (one), if the
specified item of information disclosed on the company's annual report, the score is 0
(zero). CSR disclosure index calculation set forth in the Corporate Social
Responsibility Index (CSRI), the index is calculated by comparing the number of
items the disclosure of the company with a number of disclosure items required by
the GRI (Global Reporting Initiative) which includes 79 items consisting of six
disclosure disclosure, among others: economic, environmental, social, human rights,
labor practices, and product liability. The formula is:
CSRI = Number of Disclosed Items …………….…………………. (1)
79
- Profitability ratio use to measure a company's ability to generate profits in an effort
to increase shareholder value. Profitability in this study were measured by using
Return on Assets (ROA).
- Leverage describes the company's ability to meet its financial obligations, both short
and long term. Measurement of leverage in this study using Debt To Equity Ratio
(DER), which measures the ability of companies to meet the total debt of the owner's
equity
Teknik Analisis
This research uses Moderate Regression Analysis (MRA), before that data will
be tested with classical assumptions. The research models are:
Equition 1:
…………………………………………………………………. (2)
Equition 2a :
……………………………….....................……. (3)
Equition 2b :
……………………….…………. (4)
Equition 3a :
……………………………………………..…… (5)
Equition 3b :
……………..…..….. (6)
Keterangan:
PROCEEDING The 13th Malaysia Indonesia Conference on Economics, Management and Accounting (MIICEMA) 2012
364
Q = Tobin’s Q CSRI = Corporate Social Responsibility
Index
= Intercept ROA = Return On Asset (Profitabilitas)
1, 2 = coefficientregression DER = Debt to Equity Ratio e=
error
The first step, models will be carried out due diligence model, whereas in
hypothesis testing using the test of significance (real effect) with a level of confidence
(probability) 95% and asymp. sig. 5%. The first hypothesis (H1) was tested using t test,
whereas the second and third hypotheses (H2 and H3) that examined moderator
variables using t-test refers to the framework Sharma et al. (1981).
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Sample
Using a purposive sampling method with the criteria specified sample obtained
23 companies as the sample shown in Table 1.
Table1 List of the Samples
No. Code Company’s Name No Code Company’s Name
1. ARNA Arwana Citramulia Tbk 13. KBLM Kabelindo Murni
2. ASII Astra Internasional 14. LION Lion Metal
3. AUTO Astra Otoparts 15. LMSH Lion Mesh Prima
4. BRAM Indo Kordsa Tbk 16. MERK Merck
5. BRNA Berlina Tbk 17. RMBA Bentoel International
6. DLTA Delta Djakarta Tbk 18. SIPD Sierad Produce
7. DVLA Darya Varia Laboratoria 19. SMCB Holcim Indonesia
8. FASW Fajar Surya Wisesa 20. SMGR Semen Gresik
9. HMSP HM Sampoerna Tbk 21. SMSM Selamat Sempurna
10. INDF Indofood Sukses Makmur 22. TRST Trias Sentosa
11. INTP Indocement Tunggal Prakasa 23. ULTJ Ultrajaya Milk
12. KAEF Kimia Farma
Sourc : Indonesia Stock Exchange, www.idx.co.id
Descriptive Statistics
Data processed from samples are shown in Table 2.
Table2 Descriptive Statistics Analysis Results
Variables N Minimum Maximum Mean Std. Deviation
CSR 69 0.1013 0.3544 0.194093 0.0706672
ROA 69 0.0048 0.3380 0.103597 0.0803030
DER 69 0.1458 3.1101 0.797021 0.5953513
Tobin’s Q 69 0.1942 4.4092 1.172287 0.9655388
Sources: Secondary data is processed (2012)
Test of Classical Assumption BLUE
1) Normality Test
Normality test aims to test whether the regression model, residual data have
normal distribution. In this study the normality test viewed through a statistical analysis
of non-parametric Kolmogorov-Smirnov (KS) with a significance level above 5% or p-
PROCEEDING The 13th Malaysia Indonesia Conference on Economics, Management and Accounting (MIICEMA) 2012
365
value> 0.05 (Ghozali, 2006). The results of testing for normality using Kolmogorov-
Smirnov (KS) are presented in Table 3.
Table 3 The Result of Normality Test
Data N Kolmorogrov-Smirnov Sig. Conclusion
Equation 1
Equation 2a
Equation 2b
Equation 3a
Equation 3b
69
69
69
69
69
1.895
1.318
1.290
1.379
1.554
0.002
0.062
0.700
0.045
0.016
Not Normal
Normal
Normal
Not Normal
Noy Normal
Sources: Secondary data is processed (2012)
Table 3 shows the results of tests of normality for each equation. In the first test
with the amount of data that are observed as many as 69 companies, it appears that the
results of tests of normality does not have a normal distribution of data. The second step
to improve the regression model, performed by the data center and discard the highest
residual value of the data center so that the number of observed data is reduced to 54
companies from 69 companies that are observed. Based on Table 4, then, to test the
assumptions of classical hypothesis testing and further research using the data center
with N = 54.
Table 4 The result of Normality Test After Trasnformation N=54
Transformation Data N Kolmorogrov-
Smirnov Sig. Conclusion
Equation 1
Equation 2a
Equation 2b
Equation 3a
Equation 3b
54
54
54
54
54
1.331
0.396
0.393
0.981
1.054
0.058
0.998
0.998
0.291
0.217
Normal
Normal
Normal
Normal
Normal
Source: Secondary Data Processed (2012)
2) Autocorrelation Test
Autocorrelation test performed to determine whether the linear regression model
has correlation between bullies error in period t with an error of period t-1 (before).
Good model is a model that is free from symptoms of autocorrelation. Method of
Durbin-Watson (DW test) is performed on the study aims to detect the presence or
absence of autocorrelation in the regression model. The results of autocorrelation tests
are presented in Table 5.
Table5 The Result of Autocorrelation Test
Transformatio
n Data N Dl Du 4-du 4-dl DW Conclusion
Equation 1 54 1.528 1.60
1 2.399
2.47
2
2.24
4 Free Autocorrelation
Equation 2a 54 1.490 1.64
1 2.359
2.51
0
2.07
0 Free Autocorrelation
PROCEEDING The 13th Malaysia Indonesia Conference on Economics, Management and Accounting (MIICEMA) 2012
366
Equation 2b 54 1.452 1.68
1 2.319
2.54
8
2.07
4 Free Autocorrelation
Equation 3a 54 1.490 1.64
1 2.359
2.51
0
1.97
5 Free Autocorrelation
Equation 3b 54 1.452 1.68
1 2.319
2.54
8
1.93
7 Free Autocorrelation
Source: Secondary Data Processed (2012)
3) Multicollinearity Test
Multicollinearity test aims to test whether the regression model found no
correlation between independent variables (independent). Cut of value that used to
indicate the presence of multikoloniearity is the tolerance value <0.10 or equal to the
value of VIF> 10 (Ghozali, 2006). Multikolonieritas test results can be seen in Table 6.
Tabel 6 The Result of Multicollinearity Test After Transformation (N=54)
Data
Transformasi N
Variabel
Independen Tolerance VIF Kesimpulan
Equation 1 54 CSR 1.000 1.000 Free Multicollinearity
Equation 2a 54 CSR
ROA
0.966
0.966
1.035
1.035
Free Multicollinearity
Free Multicollinearity
Equation 2b 54
CSR
ROA
CSRxROA
0.942
0.949
0.964
1.061
1.054
1.037
Free Multicollinearity
Free Multicollinearity
Free Multicollinearity
Equation 3a 54 CSR
DER
0.968
0.968
1.033
1.033
Free Multicollinearity
Free Multicollinearity
Equation 3b 54
CSR
DER
CSRxDER
0.929
0.962
0.947
1.077
1.039
1.056
Free Multicollinearity
Free Multicollinearity
Free Multicollinearity
Source:Secondary data processed (2012)
4) Heteroskedasticity Test
Heteroskedasticity test aims to test whether the regression model of the residual
variance inequality occurred one observation to another observation. This test using the
glacier testing,
The results can be seen in Table 6.
Tabel 6 The Result of Heteroskedasticity Test
Data Transformasi N Variabel
Independen Sig. Kesimpulan
Equation 1 54 CSR 0.190 Free
Heteroskedasticity
Equation 2a 54 CSR
ROA
0.356
0.676
Free
Heteroskedasticity
Free
Heteroskedasticity
PROCEEDING The 13th Malaysia Indonesia Conference on Economics, Management and Accounting (MIICEMA) 2012
367
Equation 2b
54
CSR
ROA
CSRxROA
0.542
0.838
0.072
Free
Heteroskedasticity
Free
Heteroskedasticity
Free
Heteroskedasticity
Equation 3a 54
CSR
DER
0.152
0.190
Free
Heteroskedasticity
Free
Heteroskedasticity
Equation 3b
54
CSR
DER
CSRxDER
0.099
0.130
0.369
Free
Heteroskedasticity
Free
Heteroskedasticity
Free
Heteroskedasticity
Source: Secondary data processed (2012)
Hypothesis Testing
1) Hypothesis 1
The first hypothesis in this study is corporate social responsibility (CSR) have a
positive and significant influence to corporate value (Tobins’ Q). The result shows in
Table 7.
Tabel 7 The Result of Regression Analysis
VARIABLE
EQUATION
Coefficient
Regression t-count Sig.
Constants
CSR
-0.239
3.532
-4.379
4.430
0.000
0.000
Multiple R : 0.523a
R square : 0.274
Adjusted R square : 0.260
F-count : 19.625
Sig. : 0.000a
N : 54
Dependent Variable: Tobins’Q
Source: Secondary data processed (2012)
Table 7 shows the results of regression analysis to test hypothesis 1. In the
equations obtained Adjust R Square value of 0.260 or by 26% and F value of 19.625
with a significance value of 0.000 or p-value <0.05. The result indicates that equation 1
is fit for further test. The partial test shows that coefficient b1 CSR has a value of 3.532
and t statistic with a significance value 0.000 4.430 <0.05, which means that there are
positive and significant influence between CSR and firm value. This means hypothesis
1 is accepted.
PROCEEDING The 13th Malaysia Indonesia Conference on Economics, Management and Accounting (MIICEMA) 2012
368
2) Hypothesis 2
The second hypothesis will be tested by using Moderate Regression Analysis
(MRA). This method will shows the level of significances t-test on 1 (model 2b) and
2 (model 2a) where is profitability as a moderating variable will moderate CSR to
corporate value (Tobins’ Q). The results of regression analysis for hypothesis 2 shown
in Table 8.
Table 8 The Result of Regression Analysis
VARIABLE
EQUATION 2a EQUATION 2b
Coefficient
Regression t-count Sig.
Coefficient
Regression t-count Sig.
CONSTANT
CSR
ROA
CSRxROA
(interaction)
-0.148
2.632
5.026
-4.375
5.864
10.889
0.000
0.000
0.000
-0.148
2.629
5.030
-0.341
-4.554
5.726
10.703
-0.051
0.000
0.000
0.000
0.959
Multiple R : 0.884a
R square : 0.782
Adjusted R square : 0.773
F-count : 91.440
Sig. : 0.000a
N : 54
Multiple R : 0.844a
R square : 0.782
Adjusted R square : 0.769
F-count : 59.768
Sig. : 0.000a
N : 54
Dependent Variable : Tobins’Q
Sorce: Secondary data processed (2012)
From Table 8 shows that the value of R Square Adjusted for equation 2a is
0.773 or 77.3%,while the equation 2b is 0.769. There is a slightly decrease 0.004
between equation 2a and 2b. Furthermore, F value in equation 2a is 91.440 with
significant level 0.000 or p value < 0.05. This value indicate thatCSR and ROA
simultaneously affect corporate value (Tobins’Q). There is slowly decrease F value
about 59.768 with significant value 0.000 or p value<0.05 in equation 2b. The
significant level of F value in equation 2a and 2b suggest that both equations are fit
models for further test.
The test result in equation 2b shows the value of interaction coefficient (b3)
and t-count are -0.341 and -0.051 with a significance level of 0.959> 0.05 is not
significant. The value of b3 describing the interaction between range of disclosure
(CSR) and profitability (ROA) to corporate value (Tobins'Q). Based on Sharma
framework theory, profitability could not moderate CSR to corporate value. The next
step is testing the relationship between moderating variable (ROA) and corporate value
(Tobins’ Q). The result shows equation 2a have significant level t-count 0.000<0.05. It
means profitablility is not as moderating variable but as an exogenous, prediction,
intervening, antecendent or suppressor variable for c orporate value. In conclusion,
second hypothesis was rejected.
PROCEEDING The 13th Malaysia Indonesia Conference on Economics, Management and Accounting (MIICEMA) 2012
369
3) Hypothesis 3
The Third hypothesis is leverage moderate corporate social responsibility (CSR)
to corporate value (Tobins’ Q) by using Moderate Regression Analysis (MRA). The
results are shown in Table 9
Table9 The Test Result of Hypothesis 3
VARIABLE
EQUATION 3a EQUATION 3b
Coefficient
Reggression t-count Sig.
Coefficient
Reggression t-count Sig.
Constant
CSR
DER
CSRxDER
(interaction)
-0.217
3.824
-0.180
-4.034
4.867
-2.078
0.000
0.000
0.043
-0.208
3.976
-0.174
-1.325
-3.791
4.951
-1.999
-0.940
0.000
0.000
0.051
0.352
Multiple R : 0.575a
R square : 0.331
Adjusted R square : 0.304
F-count : 12.559
Sig. : 0.000a
N : 54
Multiple R : 0.585a
R square : 0.342
Adjusted R square : 0.303
F-count : 8.674
Sig. : 0.000a
N : 54
Dependent Variable: Tobins’Q
Source: Secondary data processed (2012)
Table 9 shows that the value of R Square Adjustedin equation 3a is 0.304 or
30.4% while the equation 3b is 0.303 or 30.3% which have slightly decrease about
0.001.However, F test in equation 3a is 12.559 with a significant level of 0.000 or p-
value <0.05. This value means CSR and DER simultaneously influence corporate value
(Tobins'Q). The decreasing of F valueafter interaction test in equation 3b is about 8.674
with a significant level 0.000 or p-value <0.05. The result test indicates that equation 3a
and 3b are fit for further test.
Then, the value of coefficient (b2) in equation 3b is -0.174 and t-count is -1.999
with a significant level of 0.051 <0.0 is not significant. It means leverage (DER) have
not significanteffect on corporate value. The value of interaction coefficient (b3) is -
1.325 and a t-count with a significance level of 0.352 -0940 <0.05 is not significant.
This value of coefficient (b3) is the result of extensive interaction between range
disclosure (CSR) and leverage (DER). Based on Sharma theory can be concluded that
that leverage does not significantly moderate the effect of CSR on corporate value. The
next step is testing the relationship between DER and corporate value (Tobins’Q) in
equation 3a coefficient 2. thereslt shown the significant level t-test is 0.043<0.05
which is means leverage is exogenous, prediction, intervening, antecendent or
suppressor variable and is not moderating variable. Thus for the third hypothesis which
states that the leverage does not moderate the effect of CSR on corporate value, is
rejected.
PROCEEDING The 13th Malaysia Indonesia Conference on Economics, Management and Accounting (MIICEMA) 2012
370
Discussion
1) Hypothesis 1
Based on the test result of first hypothesis can be concluded that the variables of
corporate social responsibility (CSR) have a significant positive effect on corporate
value. This means that the more extensive disclosures that do, the higher the value of
the company, or vice versa. The results of the first successful test of the hypothesis
supports previous research conducted by Nurlela and Islahuddin (2008), Harjoto and Jo
(2007), and Rustiarini (2010) who found that the disclosure of CSR have a positive
effect on corporate value.
In the stakeholder theory, manager will maximize benefit and minimize loss for
stakeholders while their make decision in order to reach a interest balancing for all
parties. Because, maximize benefit will satisfied stakeholder and arising corporate value
(Murtini, 2008).
2) Hypothesis 2
The result indicates profitability is not moderating variable that strengthen or
weaken influence of CSR to corporate value. These results are consistent with previous
studies conducted by Kusumadilaga (2010) which prove that profitability variables as
moderating variables can not affect the relationship of CSR and corporate value.
Corporate Social Responsibility do not increase the value of the company at the
time of high corporate profitability, and conversely CSR do not decrease the value the
company at the time of low profitability. Profitability is not influential in the
relationship between CSR and firm value because the companies do not always consider
the cost associated with social responsibility as profitability increases or when the
company earns a profit. So, at any level of profitability can not affect the relationship
between CSR and firm value.
3) Hypothesis 3
The result test describe leverage is not moderating variable that can strengthen
or weaken the influence of CSR on corporate value. The results are inconsistent with
agency theory that explains that companies with higher leverage ratios will reveal more
information (Jensen & Meckling, 1976). In descriptive analysis,a moderating variable,
leverage (DER) have high mean value about 79.7%.During the period of observation of
the sample, companies largely finance their capital structure using debt. This condition
make laverage do not influence CSR and corporate value. Because, most companies use
their own funds to pay debt rather than costs associated with social responsibility. This
study failed to support previous research conducted by Fauzi (2007) which examines the
relationship between the disclosure of corporate social responsibility and financial
performance with financial leverage and firm size as a moderating variable. Research
results show that only financial leverage could be moderating variable between
disclosure of CSR and financial performance.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
This study aims to determine whether corporate social responsibility (CSR)
affects the value of the company to profitability and leverage as a moderating variable.
Based on the results of simple linear regression (for hypothesis 1) and MRA test
interaction (for hypotheses 2 and 3) are used in this study, several conclusions can be
drawn are:
PROCEEDING The 13th Malaysia Indonesia Conference on Economics, Management and Accounting (MIICEMA) 2012
371
1) Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) with CSR index as a proxy have significant
influence in corporate value (Tobins'Q) positively. This means the higher the
extensive disclosure of a company, the higher the value the company.
2) Profitability which is using ROA as a proxy do not moderate the influence of
corporate social responsibility (CSR) to corporate value. This means that
profitability does not strengthen or weaken the influence of CSR on corporate value.
3) Leverage which is using DER as a proxy do not moderate the influence of Corporate
Social Responsibility (CSR) to the value of the company. This means that the
leverage does not strengthen or weaken the influence of CSR on firm value.
These studies have several limitations such as:
1) This research using manufacture companies as a sample, it is expected that further
research will expand the sample used.
2) Profitability and leverage as a variable moderating the relationship of CSR and firm
value is not proven, it suggest for further research to look at other factors that may
affect the value of CSR to the company to enrich research, especially research on
corporate social responsibility (CSR). Variables that can be added in future studies
of institutional ownership, firm size.
3) There is a low CSR Index value in this study because of limitation and difficulties
when calculation, so it is possible some items that are disclosed according to GRI
standards are not detected. Therefore, suggestions for further research that is trying
to use another method of measurement for CSR.
REFERENCES
Anggraini, Fr. R. R. (2006). Pengungkapan Informasi Sosial dan Faktor-faktor yang
Mempengaruhi Pengungkapan Informasi Sosial dalam Laporan Keuangan
Tahunan. Simposium Nasional Akuntansi IX. Padang. 23-26 Agustus.
Aryani, Farida. (2010). Penerapan dan Pengungkapan Biaya Sosial (Social Cost)
Perusahaan Sebagai Implementasi Program Corporate Social Responsibility
(CSR). Jurnal Ekonomi, Vol.II No.1, April 2010.
Amal, M.I. (2011). Pengaruh Manajemen Laba, Kepemilikan Manajerial, Ukuran
Perusahaan, Dan Profitabilitas Terhadap Pengungkapan Tanggung Jawab
Sosial Dan Lingkungan. Skripsi, Fakultas Ekonomi, Universitas Diponegoro.
Cahya, B.A. (2010). Analisis Pengaruh Kinerja Keuangan Terhadap Tanggung Jawab
Sosial Perusahaan (Corporate Social Responsibility). Skripsi, Fakultas
Ekonomi, Universitas Diponegoro.
Cahyono, B. (2011). Pengaruh Corporate Social Responsibility Terhadap Kinerja
Perusahaan dangan Kepemilikan Asing sebagai Variabel Moderating. Semarang
: Fakultas Ekonomi, Universitas Diponegoro.
Carroll, Archie B. (1991). The Pyramid of Corporate Social Responsibility: Toward the
Moral Management of Organizational Stakeholders, Business Horizons, July-
August 1991.
Chairiri, Anis. (2008). Kritik Sosial Atas Pemakaian Teori Dalam Penelitian
Pengunkapan Sosial dan Lingkungan. Jurnal Maksi, Vol.8.No.2 Agustus 2008 :
151-169.
Cowen, S., Ferreri, L.D dan L.D. Parker. (1987). The Impact of Corporate
Characteristics on Social Responsibility Disclosure: A Typology and
Frequency-Based Analysis.
PROCEEDING The 13th Malaysia Indonesia Conference on Economics, Management and Accounting (MIICEMA) 2012
372
Diyah, P. dan Widanar, Erman. (2009). Pengaruh Struktur Kepemilikan Terhadap Nilai
Perusahaan: Keputusan Keuangan sebagai Variabel Intervening. Jurnal Ekonomi
Bisnis dan Akuntansi Ventura, Vol. 12.No.1, h. 71-86.
Fahrizqi, Anggara. (2010). Faktor-Faktor Yang Mempengaruhi Pengungkapan
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Dalam Laporan Tahunan Perusahaan.
Skripsi, Fakultas Ekonomi, Universitas Diponegoro.
Freeman, E dan Reed, D. (1983).Stockholders and stakeholders: A New Perspective on
Corporate
Governance.http://trebucq.ubordeaux4.fr/Stock&stakeholders.pdf,Diakses 16
April 2012 Jam 7.56.
Fauzi, Hasan. (2007). Corporate Social and Financial Performance: Empirical
Evidence from American Companies (journal). Faculty of Economics,Sebelas
Maret University.
Global Reporting Initiatives. (2006). Sustainability Reporting Guidelines. GRI,
Boston. Retrieved: 13 Oktober 2006, from www.globalreporting.org
Hackston, D dan Milne, M.J. (1996). Some Determinants of Social and Environmental
disclosures in New Zealand Companies. Accounting, Auditing, and
Accountability Journal. Vol.9 No.1.
Hanafi, M.M., dan Halim A. (2003). Analisis Laporan Keuangan. Edisi Revisi: AMP-
YKPN Yogyakarta.
Harjoto, Maretno A, dan Hoje Jo. (2007). Corporate Governance and Firm Value: The
Impact of CSR, Social Science Research Network.
Hopkins, Michael. (2004). Corporate Social Responsibility: an issues paper.
Working Paper No. 27 Policy Integration Department World Commission
on the Social Dimension of Globalization. Geneva: International Labour
Office.
Husnan, S dan Pudjiastuti, E. (2002). Dasar-Dasar Manajemen Keuangan Edisi 3.
Yogyakarta.
Ibrahim, Majid. (2007). Pengaruh Struktur Internal Governance Terhadap Manajemen
Laba. Skripsi, Fakultas Ekonomi, Universitas Diponegoro.
Iryanie, Emy. (2009). Komitmen Stakeholder Perusahaan Terhadap Kinerja Sosial Dan
Kinerja Keuangan. Semarang: Tesis Program Studi Magister Sains.
Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of The Firm: Managerial Behavior,
Agency Costs and Ownership Structure. Journal of Financial Economic.
Kusumadilaga, Rimba. (2010). Pengaruh CSR Terhadap Nilai Perusahaan Dengan
Profitabilitas Sebagai Variabel Moderating. Skripsi, Fakultas Ekonomi,
Universitas Diponegoro.
Martono dan Agus Harjito(2008).Manajemen Keuangan.Ekonisia, Cetakan ketujuh.
Murtini, Umi (2008). Pengaruh Manajemen Keuangan terhadap Nilai Perusahaan.
Jurnal riset akuntansi.vol 4, no 1 februari 2008 hal 32-47.
Muljati,W.H. (2011). Manfaat CSR bagi
Perusahaan.(online)http://beritaid.blogspot.com/2011/ 05/manfaat-csr-bagi-
perusahaan.html, diakses 1 April 2012 jam 9.01.
Nurlela dan Islahudin. (2008). Pengaruh Corporate Social Responsibility terhadap
Nilai Perusahaan dengan Persentase Kepemilikan Manajemen sebagai Variabel
Moderating. Simposium Nasional Akuntansi XI.
Rakhiemah, A. N. dan Agustia, D. (2009). Pengaruh Kinerja Lingkungan terhadap
Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Disclosure dan Kinerja Finansial
PROCEEDING The 13th Malaysia Indonesia Conference on Economics, Management and Accounting (MIICEMA) 2012
373
Perusahaan Manufaktur yang Terdaftar di Bursa Efek Indonesia. Simposium
Nasional Akuntansi XII. Palembang.
Roberts, R.W. (1992). Determinants Of Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure: An
Application Of Stakeholder Theory, Accounting, Organisations and Society.
Vol. 17 No. 6, pp. 595-612.
Rustiarini, N. W. (2009). Pengaruh Corporate Governance pada hubungan Corporate
Social Responsibility dengan nilai perusahan. Program Magister Program Studi
Akuntansi Program Pascasarjana Universitas Udayana Denpasar.
Sartono, Agus. (2001). Manajemen Keuangan: Teori dan Aplikasi. Edisi
keempat.Yogyakarta: BPFE Yogyakarta.
Sembiring, Eddy. (2005). Pengaruh Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) Disclosure
Terhadap Earning Response Coefficient: Studi Empiris Pada Perusahaan yang
Tercatat di Bursa Efek Jakarta. Simposium Nasional Akuntansi X. Makassar.
Sharma, Subhash, Richard M. Durand, and Oded Gur-Arie (1981). Identification and
Analysis of Moderator Variables, Journal of Marketing Research 18 (August),
291-300.
Suaryana, Agung. (2011). Faktor-Faktor Yang Mempengaruhi Kebijakan Pengungkapan
Tanggung Jawab Sosial Dan Lingkungan Pada Perusahaan Manufaktur Di
Bursa Efek Indonesia . Makalah disajikan pada SNA XI, Aceh, 20-23 Juli.
Sukamulja, Sukmawati. (2004) . Good Corporate Governance di Sektor Keuangan :
Dampak GCG Terhadap Kinerja Perusahaan. Benefit. Vol. 8, No.1.
Sugiyono. (2009). Metode Penelitian Bisnis. Bandung: CV Alfabeta.
Utami, D. dan Rahmawati. (2009). Pengaruh Ukuran Perusahaan, Ukuran Dewan
Komisaris, Kepemilikan Institusional, Kepemilikan Asing, Dan Umur
Perusahaan Terhadap Corporate Social Responsibility Disclosure Pada
Perusahaan Property Dan Real Estate Yang Terdaftar Di BursaEfek Indonesia.
Wahyudi U., dan Pawestri H.P. (2006). Implikasi Struktur Kepemilikan Terhadap Nilai
Perusahaan: dengan Keputusan Keuangan Sebgai Variabel Intervening.
Makalah disajikan pada SNA IX, Padang, 23-26 Agustus.
Waryanto. (2010). Pengaruh Karekteristik Good Corporate Governance (GCG)
Terhadap Luas Pengungkapan CorporateSocial Responsibility di Indonesia.
Skripsi, Fakultas Ekonomi, Universitas Diponegoro.
Zaleha, S. (2005). Pengaruh Karakteristik Perusahaan terhadap Pengungkapan
Sosial dalam Laporan Tahunan Perusahaan GO PUBLIC di BEJ Tahun
2003. Skripsi S1 Program Akuntansi Undip.